Zappe vs Mac

[Tunescribe]

View attachment 46514

Meh.

 

[Pats2000]

Everybody is under this strange impression where they act like Bailey is going to be amazing for the rest of the season and Mac is some neurotic guy who runs around in the pocket without any poise with a weak arm. It's been a little odd watching people get worse there as each week passes...I don't get it. I do think he got hurt in the opener with the back injury and while he said he was fine, he likely wasn't because there was a noticeable drop off in the second outing in Pittsburgh, albeit he looked only slightly better in Baltimore.

But getting back to Zappe ... does anyone remember the Denver game for Brady in 2001? As I said, everyone struggles at some point and Zappe's moment just hasn't come yet. It will. But hey, if he can be a guy who goes out and throws 40 touchdowns and one or two picks that weren't his fault every year, then I guess, good for him.

However, I'm trying to temper my emotions with the thought that we need to find out if the issues in the beginning of the season were due to the disaster that the offensive line was coupled with the erratic offensive playcalling, or if it's just Mac.

That being said, Jones has earned the benefit of the doubt, and just like I wouldn't want to boot Zappe at this point next season if the situations were similar with a new player, he deserves a shot at redemption.

It's funny that zappe came in and all of a sudden the line looked better. His pocket presence has been much, much better than Mac's. His decision making has been significantly better too. He's a rookie, so he's got a long way to go, but if you were to ask who I wanted. Zappe of the last 3 games or Mac of the first 3 games. Zappe has played within the parameters of the offense much better and sees the field well. His pocket presence, ability to move away from pressure, and his internal clock have been way better so far.

The largest concern I have has been His deep ball accuracy. The long shots I just haven't seen it, but that also could be him needing to adjust or figure things out.

 

[Pats2000]

Yes and zappe got to play against a clown of an NFL QB in goff, and a CFL level QB jacoby brissett. Mac got to play against the biggest bust of the decade Mitch trubiskey and of course he won

Meanwhile, mac had to compete against Lamar Jackson, Aaron Rogers, and Tua.

Big difference

I didn't know Mac was throwing interceptions to Lamar

 

[Zuma]

It's funny that zappe came in and all of a sudden the line looked better. His pocket presence has been much, much better than Mac's. His decision making has been significantly better too.

This is exactly right. Zappe has much better pocket presence which in turn extends plays and allows receivers more time to get open. The line has been playing better but Zappe is very good at moving around in the pocket and avoiding sacks. He also sees the field better then Mac...or at least he has been better then Mac this year.

 

[TheRainMaker]

I didn't know Mac was throwing interceptions to Lamar

"Compete against" meaning - he has to keep up with them.

Mac seems to implode when a team gets a lead on him.

 

[venecol]

To recap, according to the very opinionated Mac voters (that remain resoundingly in the minority), every possible excuse to justify Mac's poor performance is valid and every possible reason that minimizes Zappe playing better is valid.

Here are some of the excuses:

1. Mac played better teams with better defenses. Wrong - both QBs have played teams w/ bottom 3rd defenses, except for GB which Zappe played against.
2. The playbook was different because Mac was asked to do more & Zappe had a dumbed down offense. Wrong - Hunter Henry was asked this specific question & he said it was the same playbook. Sure, they incorporated more PA, screens and such, but all of those are standard plays for the Pats and still require execution.
3. Mac had newbie coaches that were getting their feet wet. Wrong - they both had the same coaches; they didn't go from being Hue Jackson to Bill Walsh once Zappe started. Nonsense.
4. The players all got better during Zappe's tenure than during Mac's. Lol, yes, every single player got magically better once a 3rd string QB became the starter. Especially the skill players that had spent an entire year + developing chemistry w/ Mac incl. off-season workouts. The same players that had little to no reps w/ the rookie through TC & the 1st 3 games + prep for GM 4. Both QBs had 5 sacks, Mac w/ 14 pressures & Zappe w/ 10. Mac’s pressure % is 12.6 & Zappe’s 13.2%. More nonsense.
5. The team defense had 8 TOs during the last 3 games & only 4 during the 1st three. Yes, this is correct but it ignores the team had 8 Giveaways during the 1st three games and only 3 during the last three. It was the GAs that lost 2 of the first 3 games. Everyone knows this. Zappe took care of the ball. Fact.

Of course, completely ignored by the Zappe haters are these inconvenient facts:

1. The rookie that had limited reps, since he was buried deep in the depth chart w/ no prior experience with the skill players, came off the bench and balled.
2. That QB play is a large aspect of and influences the overall performance of the offense. They give zero credit for pocket movement that helps the OL, fast processing, accurate passing, better ball protection, etc.

At the end of the day, Mac is 1-2 w/ 2 TD/5 INTs and Zappe is 2-0 with 4 TDs/1 INT and top 10 in the NFL in several passing categories. We urge you guys to support our young rookie, who could very well be, the future of the franchise.

BTW, it’s no mystery why the national media talking heads are all in on Mac vs. Zappe. First, they’re embarrassed they again missed on another possible generational QB. Second, everyone is scared sh_tless that Bill hit the lottery again with another late round phenom. He’ll be known as Zappe the wunderkind if they let him play.

 

[Tunescribe]

It's funny that zappe came in and all of a sudden the line looked better. His pocket presence has been much, much better than Mac's. His decision making has been significantly better too. He's a rookie, so he's got a long way to go, but if you were to ask who I wanted. Zappe of the last 3 games or Mac of the first 3 games. Zappe has played within the parameters of the offense much better and sees the field well. His pocket presence, ability to move away from pressure, and his internal clock have been way better so far.

The largest concern I have has been His deep ball accuracy. The long shots I just haven't seen it, but that also could be him needing to adjust or figure things out.

This is exactly right. Zappe has much better pocket presence which in turn extends plays and allows receivers more time to get open. The line has been playing better but Zappe is very good at moving around in the pocket and avoiding sacks. He also sees the field better then Mac...or at least he has been better then Mac this year.

Guys: The OL's improvement has been completely independent of Zappe's presence, not because of it. Mac and Zappe were asked to do different things at different times under vastly different circumstances with coaching, offensive personnel and entirely new system a progressive work in progress. That's all aside from significant differences in opponents. Comparing Mac to Bailey via their performances thus far THIS season is apples to oranges from which no accurate conclusions can be drawn.

 

[Jim Beankie]

I didn't know Mac was throwing interceptions to Lamar

You never know for this weekend...

Lamar Jackson (CB): Bio, News, Stats & more

*

www.chicagobears.com

 

[Jim Beankie]

It's funny that zappe came in and all of a sudden the line looked better. His pocket presence has been much, much better than Mac's. His decision making has been significantly better too. He's a rookie, so he's got a long way to go, but if you were to ask who I wanted. Zappe of the last 3 games or Mac of the first 3 games. Zappe has played within the parameters of the offense much better and sees the field well. His pocket presence, ability to move away from pressure, and his internal clock have been way better so far.

The largest concern I have has been His deep ball accuracy. The long shots I just haven't seen it, but that also could be him needing to adjust or figure things out.

I wonder if someone has developed VR for a QB where you just plug in past game situations to simulate moving around the pocket. I know that VR for football training does exist (like QBSIM), but I wonder if they can take actual past game situations.

 

[Zuma]

I wonder if someone has developed VR for a QB where you just plug in past game situations to simulate moving around the pocket. I know that VR for football training does exist (like QBSIM), but I wonder if they can take actual past game situations.

That's a good point. I know the Patriots have VR but to the extent on how much it's used and the situations...I'm not sure. Gunner and Meyers used it quite a bit I believe...they put out a video a few years ago about that. I'll see if I can find it.

 

[Zuma]

I wonder if someone has developed VR for a QB where you just plug in past game situations to simulate moving around the pocket. I know that VR for football training does exist (like QBSIM), but I wonder if they can take actual past game situations.

Some stuff..

Patriots get in on the virtual reality action - ProFootballTalk

The jokes will write themselves. But we’ll still perhaps write one or two of them.The Patriots have joined the virtual reality craze. To the extent that four of 32 NFL teams constitutes a craze. (Now that the Patriots have embraced it, a true craze it soon will be.)According to Shira Springer of...

profootballtalk.nbcsports.com

STRIVR CEO Explains How Athletes Can Learn, Train In Virtual-Reality World

STRIVR Labs and CEO Derek Belch are leading the charge to combine the worlds of virtual reality and athletics. NESN.com’s Michaela Vernava recently chatted with Belch about STRIVR and discovered why the product truly gives athletes a new edge in their training. To find out what Belch had to say...

nesn.com

 

[venecol]

Like clock work right after my post #366 we get this from the Zappe haters. Excuses, excuses and more excuses. It's sad man.

Guys: The OL's improvement has been completely independent of Zappe's presence, not because of it. Mac and Zappe were asked to do different things at different times under vastly different circumstances with coaching, offensive personnel and entirely new system a progressive work in progress. That's all aside from significant differences in opponents. Comparing Mac to Bailey via their performances thus far THIS season is apples to oranges from which no accurate conclusions can be drawn.

 

[Ian]

To recap, according to the very opinionated Mac voters (that remain resoundingly in the minority), every possible excuse to justify Mac's poor performance is valid and every possible reason that minimizes Zappe playing better is valid.

Here are some of the excuses:

1. Mac played better teams with better defenses. Wrong - both QBs have played teams w/ bottom 3rd defenses, except for GB which Zappe played against.
2. The playbook was different because Mac was asked to do more & Zappe had a dumbed down offense. Wrong - Hunter Henry was asked this specific question & he said it was the same playbook. Sure, they incorporated more PA, screens and such, but all of those are standard plays for the Pats and still require execution.
3. Mac had newbie coaches that were getting their feet wet. Wrong - they both had the same coaches; they didn't go from being Hue Jackson to Bill Walsh once Zappe started. Nonsense.
4. The players all got better during Zappe's tenure than during Mac's. Lol, yes, every single player got magically better once a 3rd string QB became the starter. Especially the skill players that had spent an entire year + developing chemistry w/ Mac incl. off-season workouts. The same players that had little to no reps w/ the rookie through TC & the 1st 3 games + prep for GM 4. Both QBs had 5 sacks, Mac w/ 14 pressures & Zappe w/ 10. Mac’s pressure % is 12.6 & Zappe’s 13.2%. More nonsense.
5. The team defense had 8 TOs during the last 3 games & only 4 during the 1st three. Yes, this is correct but it ignores the team had 8 Giveaways during the 1st three games and only 3 during the last three. It was the GAs that lost 2 of the first 3 games. Everyone knows this. Zappe took care of the ball. Fact.

Of course, completely ignored by the Zappe haters are these inconvenient facts:

1. The rookie that had limited reps, since he was buried deep in the depth chart w/ no prior experience with the skill players, came off the bench and balled.
2. That QB play is a large aspect of and influences the overall performance of the offense. They give zero credit for pocket movement that helps the OL, fast processing, accurate passing, better ball protection, etc.

At the end of the day, Mac is 1-2 w/ 2 TD/5 INTs and Zappe is 2-0 with 4 TDs/1 INT and top 10 in the NFL in several passing categories. We urge you guys to support our young rookie, who could very well be, the future of the franchise.

BTW, it’s no mystery why the national media talking heads are all in on Mac vs. Zappe. First, they’re embarrassed they again missed on another possible generational QB. Second, everyone is scared sh_tless that Bill hit the lottery again with another late round phenom. He’ll be known as Zappe the wunderkind if they let him play.

View attachment 46517

LOL, you realize the final answer is going to play itself out anyway, right?

I'm good with saying, "OK, we saw the kid do some great things and at least we're possibly covered if things go sideways. But let's see if three games and nearly a month away makes Mac come back a better player." At least then, we really know some of these answers. That and Zappe's stock is obviously higher right now than if he had just played a bad game.

So it's all good and I definitely feel better either way now than I probably would have had we just gone 0-3 or 1-2 with Hoyer starting. But the answer to this whole thing is going to play itself out. Still have 11 weeks of football left to go

 

[Ian]

To recap, according to the very opinionated Mac voters (that remain resoundingly in the minority), every possible excuse to justify Mac's poor performance is valid and every possible reason that minimizes Zappe playing better is valid.

Here are some of the excuses:

1. Mac played better teams with better defenses. Wrong - both QBs have played teams w/ bottom 3rd defenses, except for GB which Zappe played against.
2. The playbook was different because Mac was asked to do more & Zappe had a dumbed down offense. Wrong - Hunter Henry was asked this specific question & he said it was the same playbook. Sure, they incorporated more PA, screens and such, but all of those are standard plays for the Pats and still require execution.
3. Mac had newbie coaches that were getting their feet wet. Wrong - they both had the same coaches; they didn't go from being Hue Jackson to Bill Walsh once Zappe started. Nonsense.
4. The players all got better during Zappe's tenure than during Mac's. Lol, yes, every single player got magically better once a 3rd string QB became the starter. Especially the skill players that had spent an entire year + developing chemistry w/ Mac incl. off-season workouts. The same players that had little to no reps w/ the rookie through TC & the 1st 3 games + prep for GM 4. Both QBs had 5 sacks, Mac w/ 14 pressures & Zappe w/ 10. Mac’s pressure % is 12.6 & Zappe’s 13.2%. More nonsense.
5. The team defense had 8 TOs during the last 3 games & only 4 during the 1st three. Yes, this is correct but it ignores the team had 8 Giveaways during the 1st three games and only 3 during the last three. It was the GAs that lost 2 of the first 3 games. Everyone knows this. Zappe took care of the ball. Fact.

Of course, completely ignored by the Zappe haters are these inconvenient facts:

1. The rookie that had limited reps, since he was buried deep in the depth chart w/ no prior experience with the skill players, came off the bench and balled.
2. That QB play is a large aspect of and influences the overall performance of the offense. They give zero credit for pocket movement that helps the OL, fast processing, accurate passing, better ball protection, etc.

At the end of the day, Mac is 1-2 w/ 2 TD/5 INTs and Zappe is 2-0 with 4 TDs/1 INT and top 10 in the NFL in several passing categories. We urge you guys to support our young rookie, who could very well be, the future of the franchise.

BTW, it’s no mystery why the national media talking heads are all in on Mac vs. Zappe. First, they’re embarrassed they again missed on another possible generational QB. Second, everyone is scared sh_tless that Bill hit the lottery again with another late round phenom. He’ll be known as Zappe the wunderkind if they let him play.

View attachment 46517

And I agree on your last point. I think a lot of teams are upset they didn't take a shot at him, but at the same time, it's hard not to wonder if he would have been as good being coached by someone else. Based on Mac and Zappe, Belichick appears to be pretty good at coaching young quarterbacks as, according to several reports, he was apparently involved more than people apparently realized.

If Zappe ends up being a late-round phenom, the Patriots are already ahead of the game, and since he's still a rookie, they've got plenty of time to let this play out and make sure the right guy ends up under center for the long-term. If it's Mac, great. If it's not, and it's Zappe, great. Either way, we win

Plenty of time to let it play out

 

[venecol]

And I agree on your last point. I think a lot of teams are upset they didn't take a shot at him, but at the same time, it's hard not to wonder if he would have been as good being coached by someone else. Based on Mac and Zappe, Belichick appears to be pretty good at coaching young quarterbacks as, according to several reports, he was apparently involved more than people apparently realized.

If Zappe ends up being a late-round phenom, the Patriots are already ahead of the game, and since he's still a rookie, they've got plenty of time to let this play out and make sure the right guy ends up under center for the long-term. If it's Mac, great. If it's not, and it's Zappe, great. Either way, we win

Plenty of time to let it play out

Agree. I've been critical of Bill's GM role with the recent drafts, but can you imagine if this unknown kid turns out to be a phenom? At least Brady was coming from Michigan. Boy oh boy, Bill can tell all his critics (me incl.) to GFY and probably doesn't retire until he's 77. Lol

 

[Pats2000]

"Compete against" meaning - he has to keep up with them.

Mac seems to implode when a team gets a lead on him.

Mac was imploding this year with or without the lead

 

[Jim Beankie]

That's a good point. I know the Patriots have VR but to the extent on how much it's used and the situations...I'm not sure. Gunner and Meyers used it quite a bit I believe...they put out a video a few years ago about that. I'll see if I can find it.

Thanks again. I feel like I should turn in my #1 Jakobi fan (non friends or family edition) card for not knowing this.

Patriots rookie receivers credit 'virtual room' in preparing them for emergency roles

FOXBORO -- Gunner Olszewski and Jakobi Meyers will typically finish off a Patriots practice exhausted. They sit behind three veterans on the depth chart, and there are no wideouts on the practice squad. That means when it's time for the scout team to run its plays, they have two undrafted rookie...

www.nbcsports.com

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Guys: The OL's improvement has been completely independent of Zappe's presence, not because of it.

To borrow from something someone said back in the Cassel days, a QB can have one of three roles in a victory:

• You can win in spite of your QB. This is when your QB plays poorly, but your team still wins.
• You can win because of your QB. This is when your QB plays well.
• You can win with your QB. This is when your QB doesn't really hurt you, but doesn't help you much either.

In 2008, Matt Cassel arguably started off 2008 in "in spite of" territory, but was in "because of" territory by season's end—see, for example, the Raiders game.

For a lot of last year, Jones was in the "with" category, with a couple of "because of" games.

Right now, I'd say given the way he's played so far, Zappe has been squarely in the "with" category. He's not making so many impressive plays that he's a key factor, but he's not hurting the team much either. I don't know if we're going to see enough of him this year to know if he can get to "because of" territory.

 

[Tunescribe]

Like clock work right after my post #366 we get this from the Zappe haters. Excuses, excuses and more excuses. It's sad man.

Huh? Excuse me, I wasn't addressing your subjectively conjured "Mac vs. Zappe" campaign, my response was directed to two other posters. But as long as you've broached this uninvited, I will respond to you as well:

1). I sure as hell am no "Zappe hater," so you can shove that B.S. once and for all. I love what the kid has shown thus far and my opinion on that hasn't changed since witnessing his debut in Green Bay firsthand. My posts in support of him speak for themselves.

2). My primary point all along has been that respective circumstances surrounding Mac's rough start through being injured and Bailey's successful showing have been vastly different. This is indisputable regardless of how you want to parse, interpret, statistically cherry-pick or rewrite history in service to a silly campaign. Consequently, there CURRENTLY is no logical apples-to-apples basis of comparison for arguing that Bailey should supplant Mac as Patriots starting quarterback. Might that change? Of course it could as much as I doubt it -- I happen to believe based on sample size, physicality and demonstrated skill set that a healthy Mac is the better player. Should BB determine otherwise I happily will support that decision because by definition it will be in the team's best winning interests.

3). Unlike you I am not invested in either player, that to like Mac you have to hate Bailey, or vice versa. I asked you this a couple times yet you refused to answer: why can't it be Mac AND Zappe instead of Mac vs. Zappe? Most Patriots fans shouldn't care who is behind center as long as the TEAM wins, I would hope. @Ian, myself and others essentially have pleaded with folks here to adopt that perspective. Your refusal to entertain this fundamental notion is suspicious to say the least.

4). I understand why some people are enamored of Zappe enough to want Mac benched, but that is shortsighted. Let's not be polarized toward rooting against either of these promising players. Hopefully they'll be in position to complement each other for years to come.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

It's funny that zappe came in and all of a sudden the line looked better. His pocket presence has been much, much better than Mac's. His decision making has been significantly better too. He's a rookie, so he's got a long way to go, but if you were to ask who I wanted. Zappe of the last 3 games or Mac of the first 3 games. Zappe has played within the parameters of the offense much better and sees the field well. His pocket presence, ability to move away from pressure, and his internal clock have been way better so far.

The largest concern I have has been His deep ball accuracy. The long shots I just haven't seen it, but that also could be him needing to adjust or figure things out.

He shows poor awareness of what defensive back to throw long balls to. They end up either in the hand of Pats receivers or incomplete. Advantage Jones. Maybe he can coach the rookie up.

Seriously, I don't think the causality you implied here (re: the line) washes, but it sure felt great to get out from under the wait on Mac to get in gear.

That said, who should we play? I have a Zappe preference, but not to replace Mac... only to play until Mac is 100% or until Zappe 100% starts to look cruddy... um unless Coach says, of course. Unlikely.

To borrow from something someone said back in the Cassel days, a QB can have one of three roles in a victory:

• You can win in spite of your QB. This is when your QB plays poorly, but your team still wins.
• You can win because of your QB. This is when your QB plays well.
• You can win with your QB. This is when your QB doesn't really hurt you, but doesn't help you much either.

In 2008, Matt Cassel arguably started off 2008 in "in spite of" territory, but was in "because of" territory by season's end—see, for example, the Raiders game.

For a lot of last year, Jones was in the "with" category, with a couple of "because of" games.

Right now, I'd say given the way he's played so far, Zappe has been squarely in the "with" category. He's not making so many impressive plays that he's a key factor, but he's not hurting the team much either. I don't know if we're going to see enough of him this year to know if he can get to "because of" territory.

When the D plays that well, it's got to be winning "with" Zappe. I'd like to see him against a tough opponent... but I might not feel that way the day after.

If we get the idea they are both learning and growing, hey we have years with them both under cheap contracts. Great to have a capable backup who also has upside. I don't know much about the guy we just signed, Tulsi Gabbard or someone. Like someone here acting way too passionate on the point, I think I could live without the fourth guy, whether that is The Destroyah or Tulsi.

But yeah right now the 1 and 2 spots on that depth chart are where the action is. I think the default is that we roll with Jones fairly soon... albeit with a shorter leash.

One thing that BB has done well is accepted that competition is just part of this game, including re: roster spots. I agree with @Tunescribe it is just great watching these 2 kids make each other better... even if it pisses them off.